Category: Domestic Violence

Samantha’s ex-partner isolated and abused her. He’s the first man in NSW to serve jail time for coercive control | SMH

In January 2025, he was arrested and charged with coercive control, along with stalking and six AVO breaches. From jail, he continued to contact Samantha, writing letters and sending them to his mother to pass on.

Court records described Fairleigh having an “utter disregard” for bail conditions and the AVO. Police argued he presented an “unreasonable risk” to Samantha and other women, noting he was still active on the dating app Bumble.

Before his 2025 arrest, he had been subject to AVOs protecting Samantha and charged with twice breaching this AVO, and twice assaulting Samantha and damaging her property, though these charges were dismissed. He previously pleaded guilty to one assault charge and two financial deception charges relating to other victims.

Fairleigh’s sentence is the first to result in jail time. With time served, he will be released on parole in April.

Two-thirds of coercive control incidents were accompanied by another offence, including stalking, domestic assault or malicious damage. The most common controlling behaviour was harassment, monitoring or tracking.

In 97 per cent of intimate partner domestic violence homicides cases, the victim had experienced coercive and controlling behaviours before being killed.

Source: Samantha’s ex-partner isolated and abused her. He’s the first man in NSW to serve jail time for coercive control

Half of women suicide victims linked to domestic violence | The Courier Mail

Up to half of all women who take their own lives have been impacted by domestic violence, shocking new research reveals.Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety also found children who grew up around violence were more likely to self-harm, while domestic violence offenders were using threats of suicide as a tactic of coercive control.

The alarming research – submitted to the federal government’s parliamentary inquiry into the relationship between domestic, family and sexual violence and suicide – comes as Queensland police charged 92 offenders with coercive control against 219 victims since the new law came into effect in May last year.

The organisation’s research found 15 women die by suicide each week in Australia, and up to 56 per cent of those women had been a victim of domestic violence.

Source: Half of women suicide victims linked to domestic violence | The Courier Mail

New laws close the door on domestic violence loophole – Yahoo News Australia

Violent offenders showing up to their former residence and terrorising their ex-partner will no longer get off on a technicality.

NSW is introducing laws that penalise perpetrators for breaking and entering into a home where domestic violence victim survivors live, regardless of whether the abuser has their name on a lease or is a joint owner.

It comes after a controversial High Court decision in 2023 ruled in favour of a defendant who kicked in the triple-locked door of his former partner’s home and assaulted her.

In a 4-3 decision, the court found the offender had a lawful authority to enter the apartment he was jointly leasing, regardless of whether the woman wanted him to and despite him having moved out months earlier.

Changes will also ensure an accused person will no longer be considered an occupant of a residence if a restraining order, a court order, a bail condition or parole stops them from living at the home.

The High Court judgment known as BA v The King related to a man who stormed his former partner’s home near Canberra in July 2019.

He grabbed the woman inside by the shoulders, shouted at her and threw her phone on the floor as she tried to call for help.

He pleaded guilty to common assault, intimidation and destruction of property in the NSW District Court, but contested the aggravated break and enter charge.

His acquittal on that charge by the District Court sparked a successful Crown appeal and orders for a retrial, only for the man to win his appeal in the highest court in Australia.

Source: New laws close the door on domestic violence loophole – Yahoo News Australia

Mom Threatens Melania She’ll Tell All if Custody of Son Not Returned | Women’s Coalition

All entries on Feminist Legal Clinic’s News Digest Blog are extracts from news articles and other publications, with the source available at the link at the bottom. The content is not originally generated by Feminist Legal Clinic and does not necessarily reflect our views.

Flanked by giant flags, with the Presidential seal looming above, Melania declared that she was never friends with, nor a victim of either Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell, the two most infamous child sex traffickers of our time. She insisted they were only acquaintances who had briefly crossed paths at parties.

Apparently, Melania has never heard of the Streisand Effect.

Her valiant effort to put a lid on any notion she may have been associated with the evil duo had the opposite effect: it’s blown up speculation about whatever the reason could be that the extremely private First Lady, who’s assiduously avoided commenting on anything Epstein, would suddenly speak out about the #1 scandal of the century.

Why would she do this. And why now?

Turns out, you don’t have to look far. Amanda Ungaro, a long-time friend of Melania’s, has just publicly slung some nasty threats in her direction, implying that the President and she are guilty of being involved with child sex abuse and/or trafficking. And she is ready to tell all.

These threats are most certainly being made in an effort to get her 15 year-old son returned to her custody, after her ex implemented an elaborate scheme with which to take their son away from her. The fact that she says, “I have nothing left to lose” indicates it is because she has lost what is most precious to her: her child. And she will do whatever it takes to get him back, including incriminating the President and First Lady.

Ironically, this particular crime—child sex abuse—is the one thing that can take down even the most powerful people, and, hence, whoever has the evidence has the ability to control the perpetrator, which is exactly why Epstein gathered this kind of dirt on everyone.

Trump has been accused of sexually assaulting at least four children, so it is not out of the realm of possibility. Katie Johnson (pseudonym) filed a lawsuit in 2016 claiming she and a girl named Maria had been sexually assaulted by Trump and Epstein when they were 11 and 12 years-old at Epstein’s NY mansion. She withdrew the suit due to threats on her life, but it can still be found online.

Recent evidence in the Epstein files have evidence that Trump sexually assaulted a 13 year-old girl (name redacted), who retaliated by biting Trump’s penis. Sascha Riley Barros alleges Trump raped him when he was 12 years-old and Sascha retaliated by impaling him.

All of these disclosures appear to have corroboration, but none have been investigated. Trump denies them all.

Source: Mom Threatens Melania She’ll Tell All if Custody of Son Not Returned

‘Some men might not like it’: Why women are choosing prenups | SMH

Jodylee Bartal, an accredited specialist in family law and a principal solicitor at Melbourne firm KHQ Lawyers, says BFAs are growing in popularity among women.

They set out how assets will be split in the event of a relationship breakdown, allowing couples to sidestep a costly and time-consuming court process.

The contracts may be struck at any time before or during a marriage or de facto relationship, or after it sours. Both parties must have independent legal advice before signing.

Wealthy older men seeking to protect their assets from younger new partners were among the first to embrace BFAs, triggering a flurry of litigation in Australia over the validity of agreements forged under pressure.

Financially secure younger women are also more likely to ask a partner to sign an agreement, reflecting “advancements we’ve made as a community in terms of gender equality”.

In 2017, the High Court struck down an agreement between a wealthy Australian property developer and his younger wife on the grounds of unconscionable conduct. The court said he met her on “a website for potential brides” when he was 67 and she was 36.

Sinclair says there has been less litigation involving BFAs in recent years because the courts have provided clear guidance.

His main concern with younger couples is that “you don’t have a crystal ball” and it might be unwise to reduce everything to a contract. Sinclair says it makes more sense to “quarantine” specific assets brought into the relationship rather than trying to cover every future eventuality.

Source: The rise of the prenup: Why more Australian women are protecting their assets from younger partners

Momentum Builds for Hague Convention Reform as Liberal Women’s Councils Unanimously Back UrgentProtections for Mothers and Children | Her Hague Story

MEDIA RELEASE – Her Hague StoryDownload

NSW government’s proposed removal of ‘good character’ evidence could undermine justice, legal experts say – ABC News

The Crimes Amendment Bill would remove the ability for courts to reduce sentences based on an offender’s prior good character.

While judges would still be able to consider factors such as rehabilitation, remorse and prior convictions, they would no longer be permitted to reduce a sentence on the basis of general reputation or standing in the community.

The Minns government’s reform, which it argued would reduce trauma, was announced following recommendations from the NSW Sentencing Council’s 2024 review into the subject and a sustained campaign by victim-survivors.

But at a parliamentary inquiry into the proposed change on Tuesday, senior legal figures and advocacy groups warned the proposal may go too far.

Representing the NSW Bar Association, senior counsel Dominic Toomey told the inquiry the reform risks stripping courts of critical context when determining sentences.

Critics of the bill have also raised concerns about unintended consequences for vulnerable groups, including domestic violence victims who may be wrongly identified as offenders.

The Feminist Legal Clinic supports changes to sentencing laws, but only for serious offences like sexual assault and domestic violence.

Principal solicitor Anna Kerr said the current bill was “way too broad in its ambit and should be replaced by a far simpler amendment”, arguing reforms should target offences with low conviction rates and repeat offending.

Domestic Violence NSW acting director Rhiannon Cook echoed those concerns, backing limits on character evidence in sexual violence cases while warning larger changes could exacerbate systemic issues.

Child sexual abuse survivor Harrison James told the inquiry the current system could re-traumatise victims by shifting focus away from the offence.

“Victim-survivors should not have to sit in courtrooms and listen to the person who harmed them be described as a good person,”

he said.

Mr James said good character references were “deeply harmful” and “re-traumatise survivors,” stating they often reflect privilege rather than accountability.

The parliamentary committee is expected to report their findings in the coming weeks.

Source: NSW government’s proposed removal of ‘good character’ evidence could undermine justice, legal experts say – ABC News

Rapists’ lawyers are using their victim-survivors’ counselling notes in court. This needs to stop | The Conversation

Like anyone seeking health care, victim-survivors have a reasonable expectation that what they say to a counsellor – which might include a psychologist, a rape crisis worker or social worker – will remain private.

Yet, counselling records including notes, transcripts and even audio and video files are ending up in the hands of the alleged perpetrators’ legal teams. These records, including calls to 1800 RESPECT, might even relate to counselling the victim-survivor received before the rape.

Journalist Nina Funnell has launched a campaign calling for law reform to protect victim-survivors’ counselling records from subpoena in rape trials. The campaign has garnered thousands of signatures and widespread community support.

Each state and territory in Australia has laws that are meant to protect counselling records from being used in court. These protections are often referred to as a sexual assault communications privilege. The privilege operates differently across Australia.

But police, prosecution or defence legal teams may subpoena notes about the content of counselling sessions to be used as evidence in a case. A subpoena is a court order that legally requires someone to give documents to the court.

Counselling services can resist subpoenas in some circumstances. And most specialist sexual assault services do, as policy. Others, such as 1800 RESPECT, fail to fight subpoenas.

We urgently need stronger law reform across Australia to protect victim-survivors’ counselling records from being subpoenaed. As the Australian Law Reform Commission recently stated, an absolute protection:

prioritises the public interest in ensuring that people who have experienced sexual violence seek therapeutic treatment and are not deterred from reporting.

If you are calling a sexual assault crisis hotline, you can request that your call not be recorded. Or, you can call a service that does not record calls, such as 1800 FULL STOP.

You can be anonymous. You do not have to give any identifying details, including your name. You can use a fake name if you prefer. You can turn caller-ID off, too.

If police ask you to sign over consent to having your records accessed, you can say no. Before you agree, you should seek your own independent legal advice, including through legal aid, women’s legal services or a sexual assault service in your area.

Victim-survivors deserve to access confidential counselling and support in the aftermath of sexual violence. Governments owe survivors – and the community – a safe therapeutic service system.

Source: Rapists’ lawyers are using their victim-survivors’ counselling notes in court. This needs to stop

Judge urges profession to ‘soften your gaze’ when dealing with DFV – Proctor

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Judge Her Honour Kara Best urged the profession to “soften its gaze” to help stop the justice system from failing women and children at a recent International Women’s Day event in Brisbane.

“So what we know through the work that the Court does in recognising risk at the outset is that some 77 per cent of notices of risk that are filed at the beginning of a family law matter reveal an allegation as to the exposure or incidence of family violence.

“Thereafter, the statistics are nearly as high in relation to allegations of abuse, exposure to risks of abduction, mental health difficulties and alcohol and drug abuse.”

Judge Best said the evidence further reflected that many of these risks occurred together.

“We know that maladaptive behaviours tend to flow from being subjected to long-term violence and coercive control,” Her Honour said.

“We know that many perpetrators then use that maladaptive behaviour in a victim; the fact that a mother for example might be drinking too much or using another drug which is not appropriate, as a way of targeting and controlling any prospect of them leaving or thinking that they would retain the care of a child or could potentially get a job or in any way move forward in their life away from the abuser.

Just because there are problems on both sides, they need to be individually assessed and assessed in detail rather than writing off both parents as being problematic and a risk to their children.

“That is rarely the case. It is rarely the case that both parents are at risk of the same nature or severity.”

Source: Judge urges profession to ‘soften your gaze’ when dealing with DFV – Proctor

Family violence protection orders can be a lifeline, but the system needs reforming | The Conversation

The protection order system in each state and territory is slightly different. The orders have different names, the definitions of family violence that underpin them is different, the orders made can have different durations from months to years, and they apply to different relationships.

Protection orders are part of state and territory law. The family law system is part of the federal law system. This state/federal divide can be a problem.

State and territory magistrates have the power to include children as protected people on protection orders across Australia. Magistrates can also vary family court orders, where they think people are unsafe.

However, victim-survivors report some magistrates are reluctant to include children on protection orders. It’s also rare for magistrates to vary orders coming from the family court. This may be because some magistrates see the family law system as responsible for making orders about children.

This state/federal divide often requires victim-survivors to navigate two separate court systems to seek protection and resolve parenting or property disputes.

The disconnect between systems also facilitates systems abuse with respondents playing off systems against each other, delaying legal cases, forcing ongoing contact and further abusing victim-survivors.

In 2017 laws were changed so that a protection order made in one state or territory can be enforced by police in another state or territory. This ensures victim-survivors do not need to apply for a new protection order when they move interstate.

However, the presence of a protection order does not guarantee safety for victim-survivors. In 40% of cases where a woman was killed by a current or former partner, she had a protection order.

In some cases, police misidentify victim-survivors as the violent person and take out a protection order against the wrong party.

Source: Family violence protection orders can be a lifeline, but the system needs reforming